Scudrunners

[url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -high.html]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -high.html[/url]

:o

No fan blades left? :o
I wonder how much drag that engine created
No knowing any better I would have guessed that an engine
was more likely to disintegrate at a very high power setting rather than cruise
 

I'll bet the pilots are pissed. Cosmetics made them land in bum fuck no where. I'm sure if they had their choice it would have been a more major centre with better support to handle that many pax.

[quote author=vanNostrum link=topic=7191.msg19524#msg19524 date=1506819645]
No fan blades left? :o
I wonder how much drag that engine created
No knowing any better I would have guessed that an engine
was more likely to disintegrate at a very high power setting rather than cruise
[/quote]

Engines are already running at a high power setting in cruise.

Example:- On my aircraft cruise power is around 88% N1 (the fan speed is 88% of rated maximum).

In this case it looks like something sheared or seized. I'm sure this is being looked at very closely.

[quote author=Eric Janson link=topic=7191.msg19605#msg19605 date=1507134516]
[quote author=vanNostrum link=topic=7191.msg19524#msg19524 date=1506819645]
No fan blades left? :o
I wonder how much drag that engine created
No knowing any better I would have guessed that an engine
was more likely to disintegrate at a very high power setting rather than cruise
[/quote]

Engines are already running at a high power setting in cruise.

Example:- On my aircraft cruise power is around 88% N1 (the fan speed is 88% of rated maximum).

In this case it looks like something sheared or seized. I'm sure this is being looked at very closely.
[/quote]


Eric
I have zero experience operating a turbine engine so I'm happy to learn :)
My comment on the likelihood of an engine disintegrating at a higher power setting
is based on I making some assumptions  :-\


T O and climb requires higher power settings than cruise
[size=small][font=Verdana]Higher P S produces higher stress and temperatures in the engine, therefore increase[/font][/size]
[size=2]risk of structural failure[/size]
[size=2] A turbofan at 85% N1 at lower altitudes, where T O and climb takes place, produces higher temperatures and stress in  the engine than [/size]
[size=2]the same RPM at cruise[/size]
[size=2]Centripetal force in the rotating parts varies with the square of the rotating velocity[angular][/size]
[size=2]Increasing N1 from 85% to 96% increases CF by more than 20% and the stress on the rotating parts[/size]
Are there  there are any stats regarding in  what face of flight are turbofan engines structural failures more
likely to occur ? 
Be interesting to know

@vanNostrum

Everything you're stating is correct.

I don't have statistics but I'm sure they'll show the highest failure rate on take-off and initial climb.